HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 4, 1978 f
4��xMEMO TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator
RE: April 4th Agenda
DATE: March 30, 1978
This agenda may be longer than we can handle in one meeting.
I have attempted to keep as much off as possible , however, I have
done rather poorly.
I would suggest that we continue this meeting to Tuesday,
April 11th if need be . I do request that we give majro emphasis at
this meeting on the following matters :
11 The Board of Review
21 10 Acre Minimum Lot Policy
3] Proposed Revenue Producing Facility - Racketball Court
41 Joint meeting with the Police Civil Service Commission
DSR/jsc
Board of Review Materials
\ and
Racketball Feasibility Study
JOINT MEETING. . . .SHAKOPEE RECREATION BOARD
SHAKOPEE SCHOOL BOARD
SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
March 28, 1978. . . . . . . . . . . . . .School District Board Meeting Room
(Each agency will invite their ap ropriate staff
members to also be in attendance
AGENDA
6:30 P.M. Call To Order. . . . .Richard Stoks, Chmn.
a. Welcome and acknowledgement and introduction of those in
attendance.
b. Statement of purpose of the meeting.
c. Brief History of the Shakopee Recreation Board from
beginning to present.
d. Funding Problem as seen by the City Of Shakopee.
e. Funding Problem as seen by School District #720.
f. Potential Funding Remedys - School and City.
g. Where to go from here.
h. Other joint matters e.g. tennis courts etc.
i. Other Business
J. Adjournment
_4x
A FEASIBILITY STUDY OF A RACQUETBALL FACILITY
OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Introduction
This feasibility study is part of an attempt to find alternative
sources of revenue to support the Recreation program of the City
of Shakopee . The Joint Recreation Board as we now know it was
created in 1954 as a joint venture of the School District and the
City. Since that time , the school district and the City have con-
tributed on an equal basis towards the cost of operating the Rec-
reation Board and its programs . The City and the School District
are contributing $26 , 333 .00 each towards the 1.978 operation of the
Joint Recreation Board . The $52 , 666 .00 represents 70% of the total
1978 revenues . User fees do offset the cost of part time help and
the supplies needed to run a specific activity. It has become in-
creasingly difficult in the last few years for both bodies to con-
tribute towards the support of the Joint Recreation Board . It is
expected to become even more difficult in future years .
The purpose of this study is to show that a municipally owned
racquetball facility would be financially feasible . This facil-
ity would be revenue producing . It would make a profit . This
profit would be used to finance the Recreation Department . The
two major reasons for the strong feasibility of this project are
in my opinion:
1 . Shakopee does not have a racquetball_ facility at present .
There is a good demand for a facility now and this demand
will increase in future years .
2 . A municipally owned facility has a competitive advantage
in that it is exempt from real estate taxes and that it
can borrow money at a lower rate of interest .
These two items make the operation of a facility much more attrac-
tive financially to a city than to a private owner .
Viability of Racquetball
Racquetball is a relatively new court game that is played in an
enclosed, four-walled court with a short-handled , tennis-type
racquet . The rules are fairly simple . In brief , a shot must be
returned on the fly or after one bounce , and may hit any wall or
ceiling as long as it strikes the front wall before touching the
floor. The harder and lower the ball is hit , the better. Only
the server scores points , and service changes when the opponent
wins a rally . The first person to score twenty-one points wins .
Page 2
Viability of Racquetball (cont ' d)
Racquetball is most often played by two, but can be adapted for
three or four. Four play doubles and the three player game is
an "everyone else against the server affair" called "cut-throat ."
The game of racquetball is one of the fastest growing participant
sports in the United States . The National Racquetball Association
claims that the number of racquetball players in the United States
has increased from approximately 250,000 in 1970 to 5 . 6 million by
the end of 1977 .
The big boom has been in clubs - commercial establishments that
have gotten the game out of the YMCA and into semi-posh surround-
ings. The National Racquetball Association says there were no
court clubs in 1970, fifteen in 1973 , and seven hundred fifty by
the end of 1977 .
According to Bob Adams , the chairman of the Minnesota State Rac-
quetball Association, there are approximately 50,000 racquetball
players that belong to court clubs in the state of Minnesota . Of
these , Adams estimates that about 20,000 belong to racquetball
court clubs in the Minneapolis area.
There is good reason to believe that racquetball is a sport that
is here to stay and that it will continue to grow in popularity.
A primary factor in racquetball ' s increasing popularity is that
it is easy to learn and easy to play, thus appealing to both sexes
and to all age levels . The National Racquetball Association es-
timates that 40% of all racquetball players in the United States
are women.
With any racquet-sports experience , experts say, a novice should
be able to keep the ball in play at the end of an hour. Just about
anybody, regardless of athletic ability, can play racquetball .
Another factor contributing to racquetball ' s popularity is the ex-
ercise it provides . Racquetball provides instant exercise , requir-
ing minimum skill and minimum practice, and offers close to maximum
exertion. In an increasingly health-oriented society, many people
are drawn to racquetball for quick, strenuous workouts .
Page 3
Survey of Racquetball Facilities
NOTE : These are numbered to correspond with the numbers on the
metropolitan area map.
I . The Court House
1155 Ford Road
Golden Valley
Number of courts : 8 Plus 4 being added this summer
Yearly membership fee : $60 .00 - plus $2 . 50/person/court/hour
Added features : Sauna, Whirlpool
2 . Northwest Tennis Center
Cedar Lake Road
St . Louis Park
Number of courts : 1.5
Yearly membership fee : $77 .00 (have a waiting list to belong)
plus $5 .40/court/hour
Added features : Sauna , Whirlpool , Swimming pool , Exercise room,
Jogging track, Tennis Courts
3 . Proposed King ' s Court
Minnetonka
4. King' s Court 11 Kings Court , Roseville
Edina Number of Courts : 6
Number of courts : 8
Yearly membership fee : $56 .00 plus $6 .00/court/hour
Added features : Sauna , Exercise room
5 . Normandale Tennis and Racquet Club
6701 W. 78th St .
Bloomington
Number of courts : 10
Yearly membership fee : $77 .00 (plus $50 initiation fee for 1st yr . )
Plus $5 .40/court/hour
Added features : Sauna , Whirlpool , Exercise room, Jogging track,
Tennis courts
Page 4
Survey of Racquetball Facilities (cont 'd)
6 . Under construction
Bloomington
Number of courts : 15
7 . Normandale Health Club
Bloomington
Number of courts : 4
Yearly membership fee : $350 plus $4 (morning) or $5 (night) /court/hr.
Added features : Sauna, Whirlpool , Exercise room, Swimming pool ,
Jogging track, Tennis courts
8 . YMCA
Richfield
Number of courts : 4
Yearly membership fee : $150 - no extra charge for use of racquetball.
courts
Added features : Sauna, Whirlpool , Swimming pool , Jogging track,
Exercise room
9 . Apple Valley Racquetball , Handball and Health Club
Cedar and CR #42
Apple Valley
Number of courts : 4
Yearly membership fee : $60 ($90 for family membership) plus
$6 ( singles) or $7 .20 (doubles) or $7 . 75 (triple) /court/hour
Added features : Sauna, Exercise room, Lounge
10. Oakdale Racquet Club
1201 Ford Road
Minnetonka
Number of courts : 2
Yearly membership fee : $77 (have a waiting list to join) - plus
$5 .40/court/hour - $4/court/hour for early and late hours
Added features : Sauna , Whirlpool
LeSeur Community Center
LeSeur
Number of courts : 2
No yearly membership fee
$4/court/hour - $3 . 201court/hour with discount ticket
Added features : Exercise room, Gymnasium, Meeting room, Ice Arena,
Swimming pool (under construction)
3Yr
Page 5
Survey-of Racquetball Facilities (cont ' d)
Willmar, Minnesota
Number of courts : 4 (additional 4 being constructed summer of ' 78)
Yearly membership fee : $40 single $60 family - plus hourly fees
of $5 . 50 to $7 .00/hour
Added features : Weight room, two saunas, babysitting service
Willmar has 500 memberships and has 200 more memberships sold based
on the new addition. The facility opened in September of 1977 .
Revenue Projections
I talked extensively to owners of two racquetball facilities (King' s
Court and the facility in Willmar) . One of the industry guidelines
is that a racquetball facility should generate $20,000 - $22 ,000 annual
revenue per court . This is based on a membership of 100 to 125 members
per court. An individual must be a member in order to play at the
facility. In addition, an hourly court rental fee is charged. There
is a small amount of revenue from pro shop sales and concessions .
Both membership income and court rental income are needed to generate
the $22 ,000 per court in annual revenue . The key question is whether
there is a market in Shakopee and the adjoining communities that would
produce 100 to 125 memberships per court. I talked extensively with
Mr. Ken Rosland, the owner of King' s Court . Mr. Rosland is presently
the City Manager of Edina and has also done consultant work for new
racquetball "facilities . He did consultant work for the Willmar facil-
ity and felt that Shakopee is very comparable . Based on a State of
Minnesota population estimate for 1980, there will be 1 ,800 males and
1 , 900 females living in Shakopee between the ages of 20 and 44. The
majority of players will come from this age group . It is expected
that the proposed facility would draw players from Prior Lake, Savage,
Chaska, Jackson Township and Louisville Township . These five commun-
ities are estimated to have 3 ,400 males and 3 , 500 females between the
ages of 20 and 44 in 1980. The drawing area has an estimated total
of 10,603 people between the ages of 20 and 44 . This figure will be
increasing as these cities are increasing in population. There are
an additional 1 , 200 people in Shakopee and 2 , 350 people in the other
communities between the ages of 45-59 . The drawing area has an esti-
mated population of 14, 153 between the ages of 20-60. Willmar has
an estimated 1978 population of 16 ,000 for all ages . It appears that
Shakopee has a good base from which to draw members and that this base
will continue to grow. The question is how many racquetball players
are in that base and will they play in Shakopee? Nearly all of the
racquetball clubs in the survey (those with $50-$80 membership fees)
have the recommended 100-125 memberships, per court and are not ac-
cepting new memberships . A court in Shakopee would open up a new
market by making new playing facilities available . It would also be
more convenient as it is closer than any of the courts across the river.
pJg
Page 6
Revenue Projections (cont 'd)
The revenue projections are based on an annual membership fee of
$65 per year for the first two years and $70 in the third year.
The courts in the preceeding. survey averaged $67 for a 1978 member-
ship (the Normandale Health Club was not included because of their
$350 fee) . The $65 per year for the Shakopee facility is very com-
petitive . Court rentals averaged $5 . 50 per hour in 1978 . My rev-
enue projections use a court rental fee of $6 .00 per hour for all
three years . I am estimating that the Shakopee facility will sell
450 memberships in the first year of operation, increase this to
600 in the second year and 800 in the third and succeeding years .
Most clubs only sell 800 memberships but Shakopee could sell more
(8 courts x 125 = 1000) . I feel that the first year membership of
450 is conservative . Willmar sold 500 memberships in two months and
have sold another 200 in anticipation of the construction of four
new courts . A new facility in Woodbury has sold 1 ,000 memberships
since October of 1977 and presently has a waiting list . In short ,
I am very confident that Shakopee would have 800 members by the
third year of operation. A breakdown of revenues and expenditures
will follow the expenditures section.
Expenditure Projections
Operating expenses are said to average about $10,000 per court (1978
figures) . A breakdown of operating expenses is included later. There
will be only one employee present during operating hours . Both clubs
that I talked to said it was very seldom that two employees were work-
ing at the same time. The Shakopee facility would have a manager
who would be a full time employee with vacation and health benefits ,
etc . The rest of the staffing would be done with part time employees
working 16-20 hours a week. The operating expenses are based on
the King ' s Court operation and should be accurate . I have adjusted
for inflation in future years . The annual debt service (principal
and interest would average $54 ,000.00. This amount is based on the
City selling $620,000 in revenue bonds at 6% interest to be repaid
over a period of 20 years . Payments during the first four years are
lower than the $54,000 to help the cash flow. A critical question
is whether or not an underwriter would buy these bonds . That is
being explored at the present time .
The possibility of a federal grant for construction will be explored .
I am not cptimistic about a federal grant because of the fact that
this is a revenue producing facility that will be operated to make a
profit . A community center , softball fields, tennis courts, etc. are
funded by grants but for the most part they are not large revenue
producers .
Page 7
Expenditure Projections (cont 'd)
I studied the possibility of building a four court facility with
possible expansion to eight in the future . The net income is not
nearl as good for a four court facility because of two reasons :
1� The entire land costs must be included in the debt service
for the four court facility because you most likely will
purchase all the land needed at the beginning .
2) Labor costs are roughly the same for a four court or eight
court facility. Only one employee is on duty at a time
and he can handle reservations , cash register, etc . for
eight courts as easily as four .
By building eight courts ycu have the ability to greatly increase
your income without a corresponding increase in expenditures .
Estimated Revenue & Expenditures - 8 Court Racquet Ball Facility
Revenue
1st Year 2nd Year Succeedick%Yr
Memberships 450 @ $65 $29, 250 600 @ $65 $39,000 800 @ 70 $ 56,000.
Court Rental
Sept . 15-Apr . 30 (45%) 79,000 (52%) 90,660 (60%) 104,604
May 1 - Sept . 14(20%) 21 ,000 (20%) 21 ,042 (25%) 26, 304
Pro Shop, Concessions 1 ,000 1 , 500 1 ,500
Interest Earnings 500 1 000 1 400
Total Revenues $130-173-0 $-133,2-07 "1$99:808
Expenditures
Salaries $27 ,200 $29 ,000 $ 31 , 500
Fringe Benefits 6,000 6,400 6,800
Repairs & Maintenance 8,400 9,000 9, 600
Insurance 4,000 4, 500 5,000
Utilities 16,000 18,000 20,000
Advertising 1 ,800 2 ,000 2 , 100
Postage 1 , 100 1 , 200 1 , 300
Cleaning Supplies 2 , 300 2 , 500 2 , 700
Office & General Supplies 431400 5 ,000 5, 600
Mileage 600 600 700
Legal Fees , Accounting 2 ,000 2 ,000 2 ,000
Merchandise for Resale 600 900 900
$74t $81 , 1 $ 88,200
Average Yearly Debt $54,000 $54,000 $ 54,000
Service for 20 year
life of bonds
Total Expenditures $128,400 $135, 100 1142 . 200
Net Income $ 2 , 350 $ 18, 102 $ 47 ,608
Page 8
Conclusions
It appears that a racquetball facility owned and operated by the
City of Shakopee is financially feasible . When the facility is
operating at nearly full capacity (800 memberships) it can show
a prcfit of approximately $47,000 per year . It appears that there
is a market for a racquetball facility in the Shakopee area and
that there will be 800 players within the next two or three years .
The City of Shakopee does enjoy a competitive advantage in that
it can borrow money at a lower rate and does not have to pay real
estate taxes . The City would continue to have these advantages
during the life of the facility. It is not reasonable to assume
that there would be $47,000 per year available to finance the
recreation program. Some reserve would have to be developed for
replacement items (roof, heating unit) and the City could expect
to use an average of $30,000 a year for the recreation program.
It appears that this is a good opportunity to produce revenue
other than from real estate taxes .
Fredric Christiansen
City Treasurer
FC/klk
3;30 /y�
MEMO TO: Douglas S . Reeder , City Administrator
FROM: Nancy Engman, HRA Director
RE: Proposed New Apartment Construction
DATE: March 28, 1978
The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency has received applications
for five projects in Shakopee . Each would consist of housing rental
units of which a portion of the rent would be payed by the Federal
Government . Two of the projects are for elderly highrises and three
are for family townhouses .
The projects are des.cribed specifically below and their locations
are sited on the attached map. If and when funding is approved, it
should be for one elderly project and one family.
Elderly Projects :
1) Developer : John Bergstad
Type : Elderly
Units : 70
Location: Levee Drive
2) Developer: Loren Habeggar - Harold Wetterlin
Type : Elderly
Units : 72
Location: 3rd Avenue and Fuller Street
Family Projects :
3) Developer : John Bergstad
Type : Family
Units : 50
Location: 12th Avenue - E of Shopping Center
4) Developer : Loren Habegger - Harold Wetterlin
Type : Family
Units : 63
Location: 4th and Dakota
5) Developer : Schafoulias , Rochester
Type : Family
Units : 63
Location: 1305 East 10th Avenue
Proposed New Apartment Construction
Varch 29, 1978
The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency is now looking at the various
sites proposed by the developers and they would like to know what the
community' s priorities are .
I have already related the Council ' s sentiments that site 2 on
3rd Avenue and Fuller Street is preferred for the elderly highrise .
The family sites have not been discussed in great detail . All
the sites are zoned for multiple dwelling units and thus would be
acceptable .
My preference is for Site 3, southeast of the Minnesota Valley
Mall . The area is not easily accessible to the downtown; however, it
is within walking distance of the Minnesota Valley Mall . My primary
reason for chosing this site is because it provides a locational choice
for apartment living in the City.
The other two sites proposed for projects are in an area where
numerous apartments are already concentrated.
An additional concern I have for the site on 4th and Dakota Street
is its proximity to the proposed community development project on
4th and Minnesota. We could be creating a small concentration of assist-
ed housing, be it single family or apartment rentals . I must point out
that funding for the Minnesota Street is uncertain at this time .
Site 5 , next to the Shakopee Medical Center , is a highly visible
site . Concerns could be expressed by the homeowners of new single
family dwellings being built across the street . Without seeing the
design for the proposed townhouses , it is difficult to say whether
more of a buffer would be preferred.
The State would like a priority ranking of all three proposed
sites .
NE/jsc
s
TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADJ.REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 4, 1978
Mayor Harbeck presiding
I . Roll Call at 5 : 00 P.M.
2 . Joint meeting with the Police Civil Service Commission
3. Adjourn
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
REGULAR SESSION APRIL 4, 1978
1 . Roll Call and invocation at 7 : 30 P.M.
2 . Approval of Minutes of March 21 , March 23, and March 28, 1978
3. Communications :
a] Muriel Humphrey - thank you for information
b] Tom Hagedorn - thank you for information
c ] A Concerned Member of Local 1037 , IMA - Striking at Toro
d] Daniel A. Davis - sign variance
e ] Joseph F. Ries - upcoming meeting on 911 Emergency Plan
f ] League of Mn. Cities - deferred compensation plan
4. Liaison reports from Councilmembers :
a] Cncl .Hullander from Shakopee School Board
b] Cncl .Lebens from Recreation Board
c ] Cncl .Reinke from Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
d] Cncl .Ward from Joint Seven Man Committee
e ] Cncl .Leroux from Shakopee Fire Department
f ] Mayor Harbeck from Scott County Board of Commissioners
5 . RECOGNITION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ANYONE PRESENT IN THE AUDIENCE
WHO DESIRES TO SPEAK ON ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA
6 . Old Business :
a] Consulting Engineer ' s fee schedule - tbld 3/21
b] Eleventh Avenue Storm Sewer - tbld 3/21
c ] 8: 00 P.M. - Continuation of Public Hearing on 78-1 Public
Improvement - Res . No . 1223
d] Ten acre minimum lot size in unsewered areas - Ord. No . 2
7 . Planning Commission Recommendations :
8. Routine Resolutions and Ordinances :
a] Res . No . 1230 - Ordering The Preparation of A Report on Improve-
ment - (addition of sanitary sewer to 78-1 )
b] Res . No . 1231 - Receiving A Report and Calling Hearing on Improve-
ment - (addition of sanitary sewer to 78-1)
c] Res . No . 1232 - Receiving A Report and Calling Hearing on Improve-
ment 78-3 (Deerview Acres)
d] Res . No. 1233 - To Initiate the Vacation of An Easement in
Eaglewood 3rd Addition
e ] Res . No . 1234 - Requesting Minn. DOT to Construct 101 Frontage Road
f ] Res . No . 1228 - Designating Applicant ' s Local Agent (Civil Defense)
g] Res . No . 1229 - Authorizing Execution of Application (Civil Defense)
h] Res . No . 1235 - Supporting the Abandonment of the Chicago, Milwaukee ,
St . Paul and Pacific Railroad Company from Farmington to
Shakopee in Dakota and Scott Counties
Tentative Agenda
April 4, 1978
Page -2-
i ] Res . No . 1236 - Expressing Interest in Proposed Railroad Abandon-
ment and Potential Re-Use for Regional Recreational Trail
Corridor
j ] Ord. No . 3 - Re-Naming Old CR-21
9. New Business :
a] 8: 00 P.M. BOARD OF REVIEW
b] Proposed Revenue Producing Facility - Racketball Courts
c ] Discussion of 1978 Swimming Pool Operation
d] Report on Riverside Park improvements
e ] 1978-1980 Police Contract
f ] Authorize Entering Into Agreement with the Dog Catcher
10. Consent Business :
a] Authorize purchase of fire equipment in the amount of :
$3, 126 .00 from Conway Fire and Safety
$2 , 771 .00 from Akins Fire Equipment
$ 392 .00 from Metropolitan Fire Equipment
b] Authorize advertising for bids for tennis courts
c ] Set Hearing for 1978 CD Program for 4/18/78 at 9: 00 P.M.
11 . Other Business :
a]
b]
c ]
12 . Adjourn to Tuesday , April 18th at 7 : 30 P.M.
Douglas S . Reeder
City Administrator
TENTATIVE AGENDA
JOINT MEETING - SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL & SHAKOPEE CIVIL SERVICE
COMMISSION
APRIL 4, 1978
11 What employees are covered by the Rules and Regulations of the
Civil Service Commission?
2 ] Hiring a consultant to review the Civil Service Regulations
3] Procedure for hiring a Police Chief
4] Other matters of mutual concern
TENTATIVE AGENDA
SHAKOPEE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR MEETING SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 4, 1978
Chrm.Lebens presiding
1) Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M.
2) Approval of Minutes of February 7 , 1978.
3) Adjourn to Tuesday, April 18th at 7 : 15 P.M.
Nancy Engman
Executive Director
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE
SHAKOPEE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR MEETING SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 7 , 1978
The meeting was called to order at 7 : 30 P.M. by Chairman Lebens
with Commissioners Hullander, Reinke and Leroux present . Comm.
Ward was absent .
Comm. Reinke/Hullander moved to approve the Minutes of January 3 ,
1978 , as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Comm. Leroux/Reinke moved to approve the bills as presented.
Roll Call : Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried.
The Executive Director made a report on the proposed 1978 Community
Development Program. Considerable discussion followed pertaining
to a "neighborhood revitilization program" and the proposed loca-
tion to be redeveloped.
Hullander/Reinke moved to authorize the Executive Director to
pursue further the Comprehensive Program.
Roll Call : Ayes - Reinke , Lebens , Hullander
Noes - Leroux Motion carried.
Hullander/Leroux moved to adjourn at 7 : 50 P.M. Motion carried
unanimously.
Nancy Engman
Executive Director
�I
3b)
WASHINGTON,D.C. 20510 .
March 16, 1978
Mr. Douglas S. Reeder
City Administrator
129 East First Ave .
Shakopee , MN 55379
Dear Mr. Reeder:
Thank you for sending me a copy of the resolution
adopted by the Shakopee City Council. I do appreciate
being kept informed as to the opinions of your
membership.
With best wishes.
Sin re y,
Muriel Humphrey
RECOV' D
MAR 2 7 197?,
CITY OF SF AKOPEE �k
�-�
A4 t
TOM HAGEDORN DISTRICT OFFICES:
2ND DISTRICT,MINNESOTA `
202 POST OFFICE BUILDING
MANKATO.MINNESOTA 56001
COMMITTEES:
(507)367-8226
AGRICULTURE Con greo of the On' eb �tate� ALBERSE N
LEA,MINNESOTA PUBLIC WORKS AND
TRANSPORTATION (507)377-1676
ooe of Reproentatfba; t �� 421 EAST FIRST AVENUE
WASHINGTON OFFICE: r`e�I+�'pY y' }y } }q K SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379
325 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING Wa! Abington,�.C. 20515 / (612)445-7667
WASHINGTON,D.C. 20515 A GEORGE L.BERG,JR.
(202)225-2472 3
, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
ciry OF
Sh'AftyEE
March 9, 1978
Mr. Douglas S. Reeder
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Reeder:
Thank you very much for your letter of March 1 enclosing
a copy of a resolution adopted by the Shakopee City Council
urging the passage of H. Res. 637, a resolution which would
allow local daytime radio stations to operate at night.
I greatly appreciate learning of your interest in this
resolution and I will be glad to support the proposal if and
when it reaches the House Floor.
With every good wish, I am
Sincerely you s,
cl
Tom Hagedor
Member of gress
TH:gp
�a7 CAP t pie
3J 3 n �'� � �a•c�P � �
3/24/78
Shakopee Valley News
Open Letter;
Most citizens of Shakopee are probably aware that Local 1037 I. Y.A. ,
is striking; the Toro Die Cast Plant here at shakopee. However, I wander if
the local TAXPAYERS know that Toro is "using" the local police as their "dupes
and mouth-nieces". Toro uses local police as "escorts" for personnel and trucks,
to enter and leave their premises. The strikers aren't allowed to park a
trailer near the -premises, for their own comfort, just to "get out of the wind".
The local police hand out tickets to car owners, while parked Ov',i' THE ROADWAY,
at night for parking without parking lights. The police have made verbal
threats and other harassments to the strikers.
We of course understand that the city of L)hakoppe, has money invested in
the Toro plant here at Shakopee. But I wander, do the "City ,'athers" and the
TAXPAYERS know that; (1) Toro has shipped most of their dies to other plants &
companys; (2) Toro has removed a Processing Line and most of their Air Drills
from the : hhkopee plant, and has set it up in a warehouse on the outskirts of
Fairmont, Minn. It is NOW IN OPERATION.
Toro has made NO RFA60NABLE offer to the strikers of Local 1037.
Perhaps Toro has found "greener pastures"? It all seems strange after Toro
has had the highest earnings in their HIo'TORY. Perhaps the citizens of
Shakopee should call 445-7337 and express their concern.
A Concerned Member of
Local 1037, I.M.A.
Toro
Shakopee, Minn. 55379
Copy: Shakopee City Council
Office of the President
Toro
J
Ha
MAR 2 ,.9J
CITY OF S iAK EE
c;
DANIEL A. DAMS *'F(°EIVM
610 BAKER BUILDING
MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55402
Car O u TELEPHONE (612) 339-0431
March 10, 1978
CC&F Enterprises
c/o Mr. Al Furrie
1221 East 4th Street
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Re: Daniel V. Topel -
A&W Root Beer of Shakopee
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that we contest your right to place an additional
sign on the land adjacent to Mr. Topel ' s root beer business . Action
will be brought within the next 30 days to set the aside the zoning
variance granted by .the Shakopee city council. Should you proceed
with the installation of a second sign at this time, it is at your
own risk of removal.
Sincerely,
Daniel A. Davis
DAD: rcb
cc :Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator
Franchise Realty Interstate Corporation
Phillip R. Krass
Daniel V. Topel
COUNTY COURT HOUSE - 110 - SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 (612) 445-7750
EXT. 100
MEMORANDUM Mr. Douglas Reeder, Clerk March 17, 1978
TO: Mayors and Administrators/Managers of Scott County Municipalities
Board Chairmen and Clerks of Scott County Townships
Scott County 911 Planning Committee
FROM: Joseph F. Ries, County Administrator
SUBJECT: Meeting Notice; Tentative Plan for 911 ETS in Scott County, Minnesota
Pursuant to my letter dated Decenber 8, 1977 on the above captioned matter,
this will advise you of a meeting which has been scheduled for the purpose of
reviewing the positions and/or concerns of all Scott County government jurisdictions
on the Tentative Plan for 911 Emergency Telephone Service in Scott County.
Details of the meeting are as follows:
DATE: Tuesday, April 25, 1978
TIME: 7:30 o'clock P.M.
PUCE: County Board Meeting Room 109
Court House, Shakopee, Minn.
A number of jurisdictions have not responded with their comments on the plan
to date but this early notice will afford them an opportunity to do so before the
April 25th meeting. The effects of a 911 system may be far reaching and I can' t
urge enough, the participation of all members of your governing body.
Mr. Bob Scarlett, 911 Project Coordinator for the Metropolitan Council, will
make a presentation on the system and avail himself to any questions raised.
CC: County Commissioners
Mr. Robert H. Scarlett, 911 Project Coordinator `
OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR
i
JOSEPH F RIGS/ADMINISTRATOR
ROBERT L LANCER/CNF DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR
...
Scott County Is An Equal Opportunity Employer
•
IIII ��
league of minnesota cities
March 23, 1978
T0: Mayors, Managers and Clerks
FR: Donald Slater, Executive Director
RE: Deferred Compensation
The Internal Revenue Service will shortly publish proposed regulations which
in effect will do away with deferred compensation plans for state and local
governments. All Minnesota political subdivisions which have a deferred
-compensation plan may be affected by the new regulations.
There is legislation in both Houses (H.R. 10746, 11171, and S. 2627) which
would override these regulations by Congressional action. A copy of H.R.
10746 is provided, along with a fact sheet outlining the importance of
deferred compensation to Minnesota cities, and an explanation of deferred
compensation.
The Teague feels that this is important enough to. urge you to contact your
Congressman to express your concern about this matter and to seek quick
passage of this legislation.
Feel free to contact us for further information.
DAS:lmr
MAR 2 9
j CITY OF S!" 3tE
300 hanover building, 480 cedar, street, saint paul, minnesota 55101 C61 23 222-2861
What is deferred compensation?
Generally, under a deferred compensation plan, an employee may elect to
defer specified amounts from his salary. The employee will receive the
compensation at a later date, usually upon retirement. There is a
tremendous tax savings: to those who opt for deferred compensation,
because the amounts deferred are not taxed when earned. The deferred
compensation will be invested in various forms, and the interest on the
fund will not be taxable when it is earned either. Instead, the employee
will be sub„ect to tax liability only to the extent of the amount withdrawn
upon retirement. Generally,. most employees have a lower income during
their retirement years than in their working years, so the withdrawals
from the fund will be taxed at a lower tax rate.
Deferred compensation is important for several other reasons. First, it
is important in the support of public policy. Deferred compensation is a
supplemental retirement program which is essential in the face of inflation
and the strain on retirement systems, social security, etc. Deferred com-
pensation provides the incentive through tax deferral, not tax avoidance,
which is less expensive than full government funding of a retirement program.
Deferred compensation also helps local governments to attract and retain
employees, since profit sharing plans and bonus programs are not available.
Second, deferred compensation helps to avoid hardships on local governments.
Also, many deferred compensation programs have already been established,
expenses have been incurred and labor contracts negotiated' in reliance on
prior Treasury Rulings.
There is no other mechanism to provide retirement income to volunteer
ambulance personnel, local elected officials and part time employees earning
under $250 per month from their municipal duties. Furthermore, deferred
compensation plans seem to provide a simple to understand and administer
alternative to creation of local volunteer firemen's relief associations.
Additionally, benefits from the deferred compensation arrangement are almost
always more equitable since they relate directly to amounts contributed in
respect to each employee, and nothing is lost because of stringent vesting
requirements or fortuitous changes in benefit levels. This fact may help
attract good people to gozrning bodies and other city functions of an essen-
tially volunteer nature.
Finally, deferred compensation is important from the standpoint of a public
elected official and employee. The program provides a way to make individualized
plans for retirement, a general retirement program cannot substitute this.
Most elected officlas, volunteer firemen and ambulance attendants have other
primary sources of income, so that their public employment is only a secondary
source of income. Usually, after taxes are considered, the public employment
compensation has little affect on ones disposable income. It may be to these
officials and employees advantage to defer part of the public compensation until
retirement, when no more primary income is being generated.
OVER
FACT SHEET
Minnesota Municipal Employees Deferred Compensation Plan
1) Authorizing State Statute: Minnesota Statute § 352.96 - 352.97.
2) Coverage: Any employee of the State or any Political_ Subdivision
thereof.
3} Date of Implementation: The Minnesota law was passed by the
Legislature during the 1975 session. (Laws of 1975, Chapter 223,
section 1). The initial favorable rulings from the I.R.S. were
granted on January 9, 1976, to the cities of St. Paul, Minneapolis
and New Hope.
4) Participation: As of this date, there are 355 employees participating
in the deferred compensation program. To date, 25 cities have been
granted favorable rulings.
5) Salary Range of the Participants: While the exact salary range break-
down is not available, the State Retirement Association contends that
most of the employees have an annual salary of $10,000 to $20,000.
6) Average Contribution per year: Approximately $2600.
7) Estimated Contributions for 1978: Approximately $942,250.
05,nj CONGRESS
2D SESSION
1 U 746
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
DIr, l�`ncco��nr (for himself and Air. HOLLAND) introduced the following
bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and \leans
A BULL
To defer from income certain amounts deferred pursuant to State
or local public employee deferred compensation plans.
I Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 That section 451 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 is
4 amended by adding at the end thereof the following new
5 subsection:
6 " (f) SPECIAL RULE FOR, ATIOUNITS DEFERRED UNDER
7 PUBLIC 145MPLOYE ])E' ERRED COMPENSATION PLANS.--
S Notwithstandin r any other provision of law, regulations shall
9 be prescribed by the Secretary under this section correspond-
10 in g to t.be principles relating to the esrlusiuru from gru 5
I
OVER
2
1 income of amounts deferred by participants in public; cni-
2 ployee deferred compensation plaus set forth in the private
3 letter ruling issued by the Internal Revenue Service on
4 huttary 17, 1977, to. the State of Louisiana Deferred Coin-
5 pensatiou*Commission with respect to the.State of Louisiuiut
g Deferred Compensation Plan for State Employees."
7 (b) EFFECTIvi; DxxE.--This section, and the regula-
8 bons issued thereunder, shall be effective on and after Jan-
9 uary 1, 1977. Such regulations shall not revoke any private
10 letter rulings'issued by the Internal. Revenue Service with
1i respect to any public employee deferred compensation plan
12 or agreement authorized by State law or other applicable
13 local, county, municipal, or political subdivision law or
14 ordinance. The Secretary of the Treasury 'or his delegate
15 Shall prescribe temporary regulations pursuant to this section
16 not later than 30 days from the (late -of enactment of this
17 section.
M E M 0
TO: Douglas S . Reeder , City Administrator
FROM: Chester J . Harrison, Jr . , City Engineer
RE : 11th Ave . Storm Drainage & Street Improvement
DATE : March 15 , 1978
At one point in time there was a storm sewer planned for
11th Avenue . To reduce construction costs of the Westside Storm
Sewer, this portion of the project was deleted .
I believe that the lateral should be constructed for the
following reasons :
1 . Without this system, water must drain approximately
� mile in open gutters . This is against all good
engineering practices . Open gutter flows should not
exceed 400 feet under normal conditions . Large
volumes of water can be expected during heavy rain
storms which creates a personal hazard to the public
and a traffic hazard for moving vehicles . Instant-
aneous flooding occurs at the intersections of 10th
and 11th Ave .
2 . Because there are no catch basins along Eleventh
Avenue Shakopee dips have been used to carry the
drainage water . During the Winter months this
drainage water freezes , creating a dangerously icy
intersection .
3 . If the lateral was to be installed in the rear yard,
drainage could be incorporated into the system. Some
flooding occurs in the backyard at present .
4 . Another major consideration is the fact that all the
drainage in this area has been installed at minimum
grade . The slightest grade problem in the streets
creates a ponding problem upstream.
lateral . I do hereby recommend the addition of the 11th Ave .
CJH/jei
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Douglas S . Reeder
RE: Minimum Lot Size in Unsewered Areas
DATE: March 30, 1978
I have attached a copy of the memo and proposed ordinances which
you have previously received on this subject and also a letter from the
City of Savage concerning our 22 acre policy. I am still of the opinion
that some policy is needed to protect the unsewered areas of Shakopee
from being cut up into subdivisions at will . To be effective , the
policy should be adopted at this meeting. As I see it , there are two
basic approaches which can be taken to achieve the goal which I feel
is important -- the restriction of further residential subdivisions
at least until the comprehensive plan is adopted.
ALTERNATIVE I - 10 Acre Policy
The Council can adopt a policy which limits the subdivision of
unsewered residential property to a minimum lot size of 10 acres , and
at least 300 feet of frontage . I believe the effect of this policy
would be :
I . It would stop most residential plats .
2 . If residential property were platted, the 10 acre lots
would be more easily subdivided in the future than a 22 acre lot
and therefore I believe would be preferable .
3. The 300 foot frontage requirement would insure that some
future division of the lots could occur.
4. This policy could be altered in the future up or down
based on the conclusion reached in the comprehensive planning
process .
S. This policy could have an ending date at the date the
comprehensive plan was adopted.
ALTERNATIVE II - Moratorium
The Council can adopt a moratorium or prohibition of platting
unsewered residential property, until the comlirehensive plan is approved.
If this approach is desirable , I would suggest the following policies :
1 . No subdivision of unsewered property for residential
purposes into more than three lots shall be permitted until after
the adoption of the comprehensive plan by the City Council .
2 . Subdivision of such property into two or three lots is
permitted provided, however, that no two such subdivisions of
property owned by the same property owner be continuous and no new
public streets are required.
Minimum Lot Size in Unsewered Areas
March 30, 1978
Page -2-
3. It would allow a property owner to split off a lot
or two from his property if he so chooses .
4. It would not interfere with commercial or industrial
subdivisions which should be allowed to continue .
RECOMMENDATION:
It is my analysis that either of the two alternatives suggested
would achieve the goal of slowing down major subdivision until after
the comprehensive plan is approved. However, I believe that the second
alternative (a moratorium) would be preferable at this time for the
following reasons :
1 . It would not set a new minimum lot size which could become
permanent and would leave that decision to the comprehensive plan.
2 . It would not stop the person who now owns five or ten acres
from dividing off a lot.
3. It would definately stop all major residential subdivisions
until the comprehensive plan is adopted.
TO BE EFFECTIVE, THIS POLICY SHOULD BE ADOPTED AT THIS MEETING!
DSR/jsc
70-1
Memo To : Mayor & City Council
From: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator
Re : Minimum Lot Size in Unsewered Areas
Date : March 14, 1978
The Planning Commission has recommended that the City Council
adopt the attached ordinances which will have the effect of increasing
the minimum lot size in unsewered areas from 2 . 5 acres to 10 acres ,
effective upon publication.
I have set a public hearing for this item, have included a legal
advertisement in the paper and have released the attached press release
to the radio and newspaper. The legal notice appeared less than 10
days before the hearing and therefore does not meet the requirement of
• legal notice . However, in this instance we are not required to have
• public hearing to simply change an ordinance and therefore the legal
notice is not required either. I have advertised and scheduled a public
hearing simply to give people a chance to be heard on this matter
before it ' s adoption.
As the City Council may or may not be aware , there are currently
several (four at least) proposed 2 1/2 acre plats which have been
presented to the City Administrator and/or the Planning Commission.
These plats are located or shown on the attached map. The 2 1/2 acre
requirement has a dual purpose . First , it is to insure that the lots
are far enough apart so that problems do not occur with septic systems
and wells . Secondly, it is to discourage platting in areas where full
city services are not available . This second purpose is important to
the City of Shakopee as we try to direct growth in a manner which allows
for expansion, but prevents scattered growth which becomes burdonsome
to serve with the various city services (fire , police , street maintenance ,
snow plowing, dog catching, utility service , street lighting) . The
2 1/2 acre policy has in recent years begun to fail in the second purpose .
It will no longer stop platting and therefore scattered growth.
With this in mind, the Preliminary Comprehensive Plan which you
adopted calls for a large area to be preserved for agricultural purposes
indefinitely and proposes that this be done by requiring a minimum lot
size of 40 acres . There is no question but that this would preserve
this area for agriculture and prevent scattered growth.
The remainder of the unsewered areas has been designated in the
Comprehensive Plan to have a minimum lot size of 2 1/2 acres . This
will not stop platting and some platting may be acceptable or desirable ,
however , some refinement of the areas so designated may need to be made
to prevent too much scattering of development .
7a-1
Minimum Lot Size in Unsewered Areas
March 14, 1978
Page -2-
RECOMMENDATION:
At this time , I am recommending, and the Planning Commission has
also recommended, that the City Council adopt a policy which would
require a minimum of 10 acres in the unsewered areas . This would be
a change in the subdivision ordinance and would therefore affect
people when they subdivided property. It would not affect already
platted or subdivided lots which are less than 10 acres . This change
is recommended for the following reasons :
1 . As shown on the attached list , there are already over 200
unsewered lots available in Shakopee in plats already approved or with
at least preliminary approval .
2 . As shown on the attached sheet , the construction on lots in
these subdivisions in the last three years has been minimal . There
is no reason to believe that a great demand will be seen for these
lots and therefore we may now have a 10 year supply on hand.
3 . If we continue to allow additional scattered platting of
land in Shakopee , we will end up with more plats which have a vast road
system to maintain with virtually no houses to demand or support these
city services .
4. Plats now proposed would acid another 100 lots to the existing
inventory. These plats will have to be approved if they meet existing
requirements . If any of them get their application in before the
effective date of this ordinance , they will be accepted.
S . The cost of maintaining these scattered developments is far
greater on a per household basis than the smaller urban lots .
6. The Metropolitan Council and our neighboring communities have
expressed some concern that the 2 1/2 acre areas which we now have and
the ones we propose to have in our Comprehensive Plan may not be in
conformance with their plans .
7 . If we wish to preserve the area now designated for 40 acre
minimum in the Comprehensive Plan , we need the 10 acre minimum as an
interim control .
8 . The imposition of a 10 acre minimum now would allow some time
to show how it might work in the long run and force development into
the now vacant areas already platted. If the 10 acre policy does cause
some legitimate problems , the Council can revert back to 2 1/2 acres ,
maybe on a selected area basis where development is most desirable .
Minimum Lot Size in Unsewered Areas
March 14, 1978
Page -3-
ACTION:
It is recommended that the City Council Adopt Ordinance No. 419
and Ordinance No. 2 , 4th Series , which amends the Subdivision Ordinance
and the City Code respectively. The two ordinances do the same thing,
but because of the adoption of the Code effective April 1st we need one
ordinance to be effective until April 1st and the second after April 1st .
It is my guess that by waiting until April 1st we would see at least
one more plat .
DSR/ jsc
ORDINANCE NO. 419
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 327
BY REQUIRING THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN SUBDIVISIONS
WHICH ARE NOT SERVICED BY CITY SEWER OR WATER
TO BE TEN ACRES
THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION I . Section 704, Paragraph B of Ordinance No . 327
is hereby amended to read as follows :
B. In subdivisions where septic tanks or other individual
sewage disposal devices and/or individual water supply systems
are to be installed, the size of all lots included in such subdivi-
sion shall be a minimum of ten (10) acres and have at least 300
feet of frontage on a public road.
SECTION II . When in Force
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force one day
after the publication in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee .
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of ,
1978 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day
of March , 1978.
Ass ' t . ) City Attorney
ORDINANCE NO. 2 , 4TH SERIES
AN ORDIN:INCE OF TIIE CITY OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA , AMENDING THE
SHAKOPEE CITY CODE , CHAPTER 12; ENTITLED "SUBDIVISION REGUL?1TIONS
(PLATTING)", BY CHANGING SECTION 12 .06 , SUBDIVISION 4 , SUBPARAGRAPH
B , WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE SIIE AND FRONTAGE OF LOTS WHERE SEPTIC
TANKS OF: INDIVIDUAL, SELVAGE DISPOSAL DEVICES ARE USED; AND , BY
ADOPTING BY REFERENCE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE , CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION
12 .99 , WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS , CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS .
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA, ORDAINS :
Section 1 . Shakopee City Code , Chapter 12 , is hereby amended
by changing Section 12 .06 , Subdivision 4 , Subparagraph B , to read:
B. In subdivisions where septic tanks or other
individual sewage disposal devices and/or individual water
supply systems are to be installed, the size of all lots in-
cluded in such subdivision shall be a minimum of ten ( 10)
acres and have at least 300 feet of frontage on a public road.
Section 2 . Shakopee City Code , Chapter 1 , entitled "General
Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Includ-
ing Penalty for Violation" and Sec. 12 .99 entitled "Violation a
Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference ,
as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 3 . After adoption, signing and attestation , this Ordi-
nance shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City
and shall be in effect on and after April 2 , 1978.
Adopted by the City Council of Shakopee , Minnesota, this
day of 19 by the following vote :
Yes :
No:
Mayor
March 15 , 1978
PRESS RELEASE
CITY COUNCIL TO DISCUSS INCREASING MINIMUM
LOT SIZES TO 10 ACRES IN UNSEWERED AREAS
On Tuesday, March 21st , the Shakopee City Council will hold a
public hearing to receive public testimony on a proposed ordinance
which would change the minimum lot size in areas which do not have
city water and/or sewer from 2 1/2 acres to 10 acres minimum. The
proposed change has been recommended by the Shakopee Planning Commission
as part of their review in the Comprehensive Planning process .
City Administrator Doug Reeder recommended the change to the
Planning Commission in order to discourage new plats in unsewered
areas of Shakopee . He reported to the Planning Commission that there
are now over 200 unsewered lots available in plats which have been
fully approved or which have received preliminary approval of the City
Council . He reported to the Planning Commission that the new proposed
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance which will enforce the proposed
40 acre minimum in the agricultural areas of Shakopee would probably
not be in effect until near the end of 1978 and that the 10 acre
minimum lot size would help prevent further platting until adoption of
the Comprehensive Plan and the new Zoning Ordinance .
The City Administrator also commented that the proposed 10 acre
minimum could be revised up or down by the City Council if the final
Comprehensive Plan calls for different minimum lot sizes .
All residents and land owners who are interested in the minimum
lot sizes in the unsewered areas are urged to attend the public hearing
which will be held in the City Council Chambers at 8: 30 P.M. , Tuesday,
March 21st . Entrance to the Council Chambers located at 129 East 1st
Avenue is from the alley behind the building, where ample parking is
available .
BUILDABLE LOTS IN PLATTED AREAS NOT SERVED WITH WATER & SEWER
As of 3/2/78
Horizon Heights lst 30 Lots
Horizon Heights 2nd 15 Lots
Horizon Heights 3rd 6 Lots
Riverview Estates 5 Lots
Zoschke ' s Replat 7 Lots
Zoschke ' s Original 2 Lots
Montecito Heights 2nd 5 Lots
Killarney Hills 24 Lots + Outlot A 4.46A
B 4.92A
C 4.21A
D 8.22A
E 5.00A
F 5 . 75A
G 4. 25A
Timber Trails 32 Lots
Deerview Acres 14 Lots
Eaglewood lst 6 Lots
Eaglewood 2nd 10 Lots
Eaglewood 3rd 9 Lots
Hauer ' s lst 2 Lots
Hauer ' s 2nd (Prelim. ) 43 Lots
(Sec. 8 along Hauer ' s Trail) 3 Lots
Maras Area 6 Lots (2 . 5 ea)
219 Lots
7 �.
HOUSES CONSTRUCTED ON UN-SEWERED LOTS
1977 1976 1975
Riverview Estates 4 3 2
Zoschke' s Original 1
Montecito Heights 1
Timber Trails 3 1
Deerview Acres 2 2
, Eaglewood 1st 1 2
Eaglewood 2nd 5 1 1
Eaglewood 3rd 1
Sec . 8 along Hauer Trail 1
Maras Area 2 2 8
TOTALS 19 12 12
3/9/78
SMALLEST LOT ONE CAN BUILD UPON IN
UNSEWERED AREA
SAVAUE:
Agricultural zone - 5 acre tract
R-2 - have no zones
R-1 - will allow building on 1/2 acre lots of record
PRIOR LAKE :
Agricultural/Conservation - 10 acre tract , with clause that
will allow 5 acre tracts if platted.
-- Have a moratorium on any subdivisions in this area until
after approval of new comp. plan. --
R-1 - Will allow subdividing, but no building permits issued
until sewer is available .
JACKSON TOWNSHIP :
Agricultural zone - 10 acre minimum
May plat for 15 ,000 square feet , if they can prove when sewer
and water are coming in, and then they would be allowed to
build on every six lots or so , so that the density would not
be greater than 2� acres .
CITY of SA VA GE
-VXIL AMV7 : -
12305 QUENTIN AVE. SO.
SAVAGE, MINNESOTA 55378 CITY HALL 612/890-1045
MAYOR - CLEVE M. ENO
—,. COUNCIL - WARREN NORDLEY
TOM STANG, SR.
Home of Dan Patch HENRY E. WELCH
WILFRED A. WILLIAMS
3-28-78
Douglas S. Reeder
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 E. First Ave.
Shakopee, Minn. 55379
Dear Doug:
Attached please find a letter from Kermit
Crouch, Savage City Planner, regarding the pro-
posed Shakopee Comprehensive Plan. It appears
that Mr. Crouch' s major objection has been re-
solved with Shakopee ' s recent action increasing
the lot size in the rural district from 22 acres
to 10 acres.
Please keep us informed of any future changes
within your planning process. Your cooperation in
this matter is sincerely appreciated.
Sincerely,
Aas M. Markus
City Administrator
TMM/bjb
cc: Mike McGuire, City Manager, Prior Lake
Gregg Johnson, Metro Council
architects/planners/environmentalists
kerrnit crouch 1�
%.-�ner
22 March 1973 hodne/stageberg
ot eM
Mr. Thomas Markus inc.
City Administrator
12305 Quentin Avenue South 116 east 22nd street 871-1700 (612)
Savage, Minnesota 55378 minneapolis, minnesota 55404
Dear Tom:
City
As you requested, I have reviewed the I'r l to following commentsf orelative to inary Land Use Plan
of Shakopee, dated January 1978, and offer
potential impacts upon Savage.
outward
Quite briefly, I believe the two interrelated P Zn rohibpt on of)urban e development
expansion of the existing urbanized area and ) p quite sound and in the best
within the "Agricultural Preservation area to be q
interests of Shakopee and its neighbors. In contrast, I believe t the o Rural permit
residential development at two and one half acre best interests
Residential" area to be very detrimental toSconcoern about the in policy which would
of its neighbors. Additionally, I have some
allow development of commercial and industrial
ialndo RuralsC commercial"alo dist icts.
urban services, within the "Rural Industr
di
But my primary concern is with the apparen common boundary, visions
within the unsewered area adjacent to the Savage/Shakopee
Current land sales prices within northern Scott vCounty
thurban serviced lots (1/4rtoced
rural lots (2� to 5 acres) are very competitive
1 /3 acres) in urban subdivisions. density ico t of of two or changing its
per minimum
rural lot size from five acres to a dens y
quarter quarter section. Savage found that the rural area. mThusu Savage and Prior sufficient was not
to prevent creation of an urban pattern in the
Lake (10 acre minimum) are permitting noticreate problems assochated with pre-
mature the rural/open space character and will
mature urbanization in an unserviced area.
work
2
I firmly believe that an ample supply of z acre L e l and Prior Lake.W1Prospec-
against the staged growth concept of Shakopee, Savage
tive homeowners will often choose the larger, ers will be faced amenable
ced with
is little or no cost difference. These hom own
assessment costs in later years when urban sery ices are manner,xornwil be Many forced lt sell.
than be forced to re-subdivide in an uncoordinated
-2-
It is my understanding that all northern Scott County communities endorse the
concept of staged urban expansion. I strongly believe that the availability of
rural lots of 2z acres (and to a lesser extent five acres) in size works against
this concept and jeopardizes the public and private investments that will be made
within the urban service area.
Sincerely,
THE Hodne/Stageberg PARTNERS, Inc.
� ,
Kermit V. Crouch, AIP
KVC:bjj
JIMain Office 571-6066
UDURBAN 6875 Highway No. 65 N. E.
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432
South Office 890-6510
Civil, Municipal & Enuironmenial Engineering
1111101 Cliff Road Land Surveying • Land Planning • Soil Testing Burnsville, Minnesota 55337
M
❑ March 29, 1978
REPORT
DEERVIEI4 ACRES
TO: City of Shakopee
FROM: Suburban Engineering,Inc.
SUBJECT: 1978 Improvements - Norton Drive, Mulberry Circle and
Sycamore Ci rcle
DISCUSSION:
Deerview Acres is a platted subdivision located in the southerly portion
of the City, beyond the Present service area for City water and sanitary
sewer.
The proposed improvement is to complete the construction of a rural road-
way with a 30 foot bituminous surface and 2 foot aggregate shoulders.
Some fine grading is necessary and additional aggregate base is required
to Provide adequate structural capacity and to shape the roadbeds to a
proper cross-section.
We have reviewed the profile grades as constructed some years ago. 1,4e feel
the existing grades can be maintained but we suggest a modification at
the intersection of Co. Rd. 17 and Norton Drive. The grade of Norton Drive
is rather steep at the intersection and a flatter grade should extend east-
erly from Co. Rd. 17 for approximately 50 feet to provide a landing area
for a safer approach to Co. Rd. 17. Placement of fill materials up to about
3 feet over the existing roada y i 4
s required to accomplish the modification .
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The modification of the grades at the intersection of Norton Drive and Co.
Rd. 17 is recommended as described above. However, if no problems have been
encountered with the existing profile, the grade modification may be unneces-
sary but should be considered carefully.
The estimated cost of the project without the grade modification is $50,085.00
and estimated to be $56, 160.00 with the grade modification. The project is
feasible with either alternate grade and is recommended for construction as
described above.
R19. Fng. E. R,g.Sure. Wm E Prtre, Reg. Ertg G"IN R. P,q. Surt
Jen.rr, Reg.Erg 'J R�9, E,�g.
Reg Eng Rogers. Reg Sa,, 13114— A P sjn, P,g F,e, 41a� F Rat;—'a" k',g- Fng
ASSESS,'IE,STS:
The cost of the ',?roji e ct is 7)Y,o,)ose d to br! as. s2 s st-I d on tEi F -as is of
front footage. The tctal asseqsaole front fo,-jta-,c is 5out 2T) feet.
The 2stimated assessment rates are as follo,,,Is :
Estimated rate - existing p ro fi 1e � 9 .6 -F r,a ,t foot
Estimated rate - revised profi le ` 19. f ron t foot
Respectfully submi teed,
S tjl, I,,"I r-" I E 'i'C
URL3:,!V,' ENGINE
'4i Iliam E. ?rice, P. E.
°Iinn . Req. ',,10. 6939
,4EP/l h
enc
3/28/78 C,
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE
City of Shakopee
1978 Improvements
PROJECT: Deerview Acres
PROJECT DESCRIPTTON: Fine cradirg, anqregat2 base and bituminous surfacing
PROJECT LEWGTH : 2610 L.F.
TYPICAL SECTION:
Existing Profile
2" Bit. Near Course 30' width with rural section
2" Aggregate base 2" Aggregate shoulder
ITV —QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL
Subgrade Prep.including
fine qrading 26 Rd.Sta 5200.10 5 ,200.00
Aggregate base Class 5 2080 Ton $ 3. 75 7,810.00
3ituminous wear course 1065 Ton $ 15.00 515 ,175.00
Aggregate shoulder Class 2 117. 5 Ton > 4.10 471.00
Seeding S750 SI .Yd. . 50 4,375.00
Construction Cost 033,220.00
Contingencies 1K' 5 3,230.90
TOTAL EST. CONST. COST 537,17.10
Engr. Admin . 1 Kisc. 35! 512,925.00
TOTAL EST. PROJECT COST 00 105.00
Revised Prof le
-'or a te r i al 1400 Cu.Yd. S 2.10 S 3,500.90
lalvaqe & stockpi le base raterial I L.S. SU0.0 S 599-00
Construction Cost from above 123,829.0
S37,021.0
Contingencies 1 3,7R0.00
TOTAL EST. CONST. COST 541 ,600.00
Enn. Admins . & Misc. 35 , 04,30.00
TOTAL EST. PROJECT COST
Est. Assessable Foota7e 5200 Font
PRE-LIMINARY ENGINFERING SKETCH
DEERV I E: W A C R ES
8
r 6
{ 10
NOR 'ITOn1 DP.iVE
PROPOSE-6 SITUMINO S SURFACE {
�YGAMORg
I g
SCALE f
I uaCN =200 FEET
CAI
TO: Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator
FROM : Fredric E. Christiansen,City Treasurer
DATE : March 27 , 1978
SUBJECT: Civil Defense : Designation of Applicant for Disaster Fund
The City Council needs to pass two resolutions dealing with federal
disaster funds . The federal government requires that there must be
a designated applicant agent to represent the City in the coordina-
tion and application for federal disaster funds . The State of
Minnesota requires that all disaster funds will go through the
County Emergency Preparedness Director (Tim O' Laughlin) . The City
could appoint a local person as the applicant agent but everything
would still be routed through the county. My recommendation is to
name the County Emergency Preparedness Director the applicant agent
for the City of Shakopee. Resolutions 1.228 and 1229 accomplish this .
FEC/klk
* tY
rJ ,{
~yam U.S.( ARTMENT OF HOUSING AND UR13AN DEVEL! NT �,J(
s cDERAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATIurr
MUNICIPAL RESOLUTION
DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S LOCAL AGENT
RESOLUTION
the City Council Shakopee, Minnesota
BE 1"T RESOLVED BY OF-
(Go _ _
verning Body) (Public Entity)
THAT__. *( SPP hPlow) 'County Emergency Preparedness Director
*(Nano°of Incumbcntt) (Official Position) '
Courthouse - 428 So. Holmes 1 (612) 445-7750 ext . 181
(.I ddress) (Tell phone No.)
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
(City) (Yip Code)
is hereby authorized to execute for and in behalf of
Shakopee '
a public entity established under the laws of the State of Minnesota
this application and to file it in the appropriate State office for the purpose of obtaining certain Federal financial assistance
under the Disaster Relief Act(Public Law 288,93rd Congress)or otherwise available from the President's Disaster Relief
Fund.
THAT Shakopee ,a public entity established under the laws of the State of______
Mi nne so_t__,hereby authorizes its agent to provide to the State and to the Federal Disaster Assistance
Administration (FDAA),Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)for all matters pertaining to such Federal
disaster assistance the assurances and agreements printed oil the reverse side hereof.
Passed and approved this - day of
— (Nate and Title)
—— (Name and T isle) -
- --(Nmnc and Title) ——
CERTIFICATION
Doug Reeder _ duly appointed and City Administrator of
(Title)
_ Shakopee do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution
Cit y u Conc il Shakopee , Minnesota
passed and approves) by the— - of_ p
(Governing Body) (Public l:rrtity)
on the __day of _-_ 19—.
Date:
City Administrator
(UfJicull Position)
*Nome of incnunbcrnt nerd nor be provided in those cases where the gorenning body of the public cnritl•desires to authorize any incumbent
of the designated official position to represent it.
HUD 490 (6-77)
ASSURANCES
A. I lie Stale agrees to take necessary,action within State capabilities to require cumplian.:a wide these assurances by the applicant
or to a„ume responsibility ,o the Federal gocermnem for any.�-!"iciencies not resuleed to the satisfaction of the Regional
Director.
Tile Applicana Certifies:
It. That to the best of his knowledge and belief)the disa1.':r relief work described on each federal Disaster Assistance Admin-
istration (FDAA)Project Application for which I eder:a financial assistance is regarsted is chgible ur accordance with the criteria
contained in 24 Code of Federal Regrnkrtions,and FDAA(11(`D)Handbooks.
i
C: That it is the Icgal entity responsible under law for the performance of the cork detailed of accepts such responsibility.
U. I Ilat the erner_•ency or disaster relief work therein described for which federal assistance is requested hereunder does riot or kill
not duplicate benefits received for the same loss from another source. j
F. That all information given by it herein is,to the best of its knowledge and belief,true and correct.
V. ]Teat all finatliial wslstance received under this application will be,or has been,expended in accordance with applicable Lm and
regulations thereunder.
The Applicant Agrues:
C. To(1)provide without cost to the United States all lands,easemetits,and rights of-way necessary for accomplishment of the ap-
proved work; (2)hold and sacs tile. United Stater free from damages due to the approved work or Federal'.• ,adin
I1. To comply with Title VI of the Civil Eights Act of 1964 (PI.88.352)and all requirements imposed by the I.decal Disaster As-
sistance Administration pursuant to that Title to the end that,in accordance with 7 Ile VI of that Act and the Regulation,no
person in the United States shall,on the ground of race,color,religion,natiuratity,se:.,age,or economic st rtus,be excluded
from participa:ir n in,be denied life benefitsof,or be otherwise subjected to discriminatiun under any progrsm or activity for ;
which the Applicant receiver) Federal financial assistance front the Agency and III.RFI)Y GIVLS ASSURANC'L THAT it will 1
immediately lake any measures necessary to effectuate this agreement.
I. That if mly real properly or structure thereon is provided or improved with the aid of Federal financial assistance extended to +
the All pli•ant by the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration,this assurance s11a11 obligate the Applicant,or in the case of
any transfer of such property,any transferee,for the period during which the real p:uperty or structure is used for a purpose
for wfiich [lie Federal financial assistance is extended or for anotlier purpose ineohing the provision of similar services or
benefits. If any personal proper ly is so provided,this assuraurc-e Shall obligate the Applicant for the period during which it retains
ownership or possession of the property. In all other cases,this assurance shall obligate the Applicant for the period during
which the VC&I'al financial assist;uue is extended to it by FDAA.
i
J. That the assurance is given in consideration of and for the purpose of obtaining any and all Federal grants,loans,reimburse-
ments,advances,contracts,property,discounts or other Federal financial assistance extended after the date hereof to the Ap-
plicant by FDAA,that such Federal financial assistance will be extended in reliance on the mprese(ltations and agreements made
in this assurance anti that the United States shall have the right to sect:judicial enforcement of this assurance. This assurance is
binding on the Applicant,its successors,transferees,and assnness,and the person or persons whose signatures appear on the
reverse are authorized to sign this assurance on behalf of the Applicant. }
i
K. '1.0 obtain and maintain any flood insurance as may be required for the tit's of the projects)for which federal financial assistance
for acquisition or construction purposes for buildings or mobile homes was provided herein;and,to obtain and maintain any
other insurance as may be reasonable,adequate and necessary to protect against further loss to any property whick was replaced,
restored,repaired or constructed with this assistance.
1.. I hat,as a condition for the grant,any repairs or construction financed herewith,shall be in accordance with applicable standards
of safety,decency and sanitation and in conformity with applicable codes,specifications arul standards;and,to esahrate the
nalurad haiards in areas in which the prucceds of the):rant or loan arc to be used anJ take appropriate action to mitigate such
standards,including safe land use and constluc•tion practices.
A1. To defer funding of any projects invohiug flexible funding under Section 402 or Section 419 until FDAA makes a favorable
eneirauneutal clealancc determination,if ti is required.
HUD 490 16-771
t RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SCOTT COUNTY EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
DIRECTOR TO ACT AS APPLICANT
LOCAL AGENT FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES
WHEREAS , the County Emergency Preparedness Director has
been duly designated by the County Board to act only upon
the request and authorization of the several Scott County
municipalities through their Mayors and City Councils , and
WHEREAS, the County Emergency Preparedness Director has
been duly authorized by the County Board of Commissioners to
execute and file for and in behalf of Scott
County, Minnesota and its Mayor and City Council , any
application for the purpose of obtaining certain federal
financial assistance under the Disaster Relief Act (Public
Law 288, 93rd Congress) , or as otherwise available from
the President ' s Disaster Relief Fund, and
WHEREAS, such designation is consistant with those respon-
sibilities set forth in the "Scott County Common Organization
Contract" dated January 1 , 1972 , for the Emergency Prepared-
ness Director (formerly Civil Defense Director) ,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City
Council in and for the City of , Minnesota,
that the County Emergency Preparedness Director is duly
authorized to execute and file an application for the pur-
pose of obtaining certain federal financial assistance
under the Disaster Relief Act (Public Law 288, 93rd Congress) ,
or as otherwise available from the President ' s Disaster Relief
Fund .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Emergency Prepared-
ness Director is authorized further, as the city' s agent, to
provide to the State and to the Federal Disaster Assistance
Administration (FDAA) , Department of Housing and Urban
Development , (HUD) , for all matters pertaining to such Federal
Disaster Assistance , the assurances and agreements as outlined
on the Agreement .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this resolution
be furnished to the appropriate federal , state and regional
agencies by the County Emergency Preparedness Director.
4\XANESO;�
D� 20 -Minnesota Department of Transportation
o� Transportation Building, St. Paul, MN 55155
OF TFRP
March 28, 1978
Phone 612/296-8628
Dear Rail Constituent:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation has received notification
by the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company of
its intention to file for abandonment on or about March 28, 1978 for
a portion of its system from Farmington to Shakopee, Minnesota.
lie will be analyzing this proceeding and preparing a position state-
ment that will be transmitted to the Interstate Coimuerce Cormnission.
The Corrmiission will be determining the outcome of this proceeding. If
you have specific coiTiments re7ardinR your transportation needs or com-
munity concerns, we would appreciate hearing from you within the next
two ,reeks. Please direct your comments to:
Air. Cecil Selness
Minnesota Department of Transportation
419 Transportation Building
John Ireland Boulevard
St. Paul, Minnesota SS155
In the event abandonment occurs, the right-of-way may be acquired for
public use. If local or state units of government wish to identify a
public need for the right-of-way, their interests should be submitted
in writing to the Interstate Commerce Cormiission, 12th F, Constitution
Avenue, N.W. , Washington, D.C. 20423. Public use statemients and other
written comments should indicate the proceeding Docket No. AB-7 (Sub.
No. 57F) and should be filed with the Commission no later than May 2,
1978.
Adjacent land owners along the railroad right-of-way may wish to purchase
a portion of the railroad property. Their interests may be addressed di-
rectly to the railroad Real Estate Department:
Real Estate, Economic & Resource
Development Department
Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and
Pacific Railroad Company
286 Union Station
Chicago, Illinois 60606
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Rail Constituent
March 28, 1978
Page 2
If you have any further questions regarding this abandonment proceeding
feel free to call or write the Minnesota Department of Transportation
at the previously mentioned address.
Sincerely,
• ��c Q�z�c,�!/Le�
Larry McNamara, Director
Office of Railroads, Ports F,
Pipeline Administration
MEMO TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Douglas S . Reeder
RE: Racketball Courts
DATE: March 30, 1978
It is my recommendation that the City Council consider very
carefully the possibility of constructing Racketball Courts as a
revenue producing facility.
The following factors may have merit in your consideration of
continuing to pursue this option.
1 . It appears to me that the feasibility study indicates a good
potential for revenue .
2 . No other new revenue source has been identified to date .
3. No private proposal was presented to the City before we
began work and to date no application has been received by the
City for a private facility.
4. The proposed use of the revenue generated would be very
conservative and funds would be accumulated to protect the City
against future decline in revenue .
5. Private enterprise would be used to construct the facility
and turn it over to the City.
DSR/jsc
qj
M E M 0
TO: Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator
FROM: Jim Karkanen, Public Works Director
George Meunchow, Recreation Director
DATE March 30, 1978
It is recommended that the following imprcvements be made
to Riverside Park to make it usable and presentable for the year .
The repair can be made by city crews .
1 . Repair right field fence (+ paint)
2 . Remove left field outfield fence - replace w/snowfence - use
posts ( salvageable) on right fields .
3 . Repair outfield snowfence that is damaged - (repair only)
4 . Replace broken slats in picket fence around 3rd base and home
plate area .
5 . Repair vandalized concession door on concession stand .
6 . Build 30 ft . high backstcp behind home plate . SPUC will
provide and install at least 4-5 35 ft . poles . We ' ll purchase
and install screen. (old screen was not salvageable) .
7 . Finish repairing sewer system for the rest room facilities .
(We have one bad area left - nothing serious)
8 . Repair several bad toilets-
9 . Install equipment storage shed - (Constructed this Winter)
10. Fill over pillars w/dirt to elevate spectators on 3rd base area .
We ' ll attempt to remove the other concrete pillars if possible -
(We ' re waiting for frost to go out ! )
11 . Turn on water
12 . Grade the road arcund the park area
13 . Provide several barrels - one old table
JK/GM/jei
M E M O
TO: Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator
FROM: Nancy Engman, Administrative Assistant
RE: Contract for Dogcatching Services
DATE: MErch 30, 1978
The Council has authorized that the City hire Robert
McAllister as the City Pound Master for the year 1978 .
In my memo to the Council dated January 10, 1978 I
indicated that Mr . McAllister was requesting an .increase of
$35 to $50 a month to continue his services . He has hired a
new part-time employee and has increased his patrolling services ,
as I requested he do .
I have discussed the increase with Mr . McAllister and
he has agreed to the figure of $35 a month. This produces an
overall monthly increase from the present cost of $275 .00 to
a fee of $310 .00
I feel that the increase should be approved for Mr .
McAllister as he has worked for the City for over five years
and has received no increase in wages during that entire period .
As I stated, he has added staff and guaranteed patrolling hours
for the City . I feel the increased rates are quite reasonable
as they are still $1 ,000. lower than the competitor who bid for
our dogcatching services in January of this year .
The action required is a motion authorizing execution of
a contract for the specified dogcatching services at the rate of
$310. a month effective April 1 , 1978 .
NE/jei
Dear. sirs;
This is a summary of my services for clog catching:
I am recieving X275.00 per month. All money taken in for dogs
claimed are returned in full to the city. I am on call twenty-
four hours a day,seven days a week of which under normal cir-
cumstances I am available. My two trucks are equipped with a
mobile radio with a base at home. I also have Burnsville and
Lakeville police department frequencies on the radio. They can
and will contact me for emergencies. I also have a pageboy with
Burnsville police department, so I can be contacted if I am out
of the vehicle or not available at my residence.
I am averaging a minimun of ten hours a week in your city.
The amount of time spent will vary with the necessity retuined
to handle the situation. Sometimes you will be able to handle
the call in a matter of minutes where as the next. call may reguire
a great amount of time.
I have a part-time employee, who is workin about an average
of six hours a day. I hope to continue this part-time employment
to see if I can handle the added expense accrued, continuing to
increase and upgrade my services.
I would like to request a increase of 935.00 monthly to my
salary.
S' rely
l Robert McAllister
TO: Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator
FROM: Fredric E. Christiansen, City Treasurer
DATE : March 27 , 1978
SUBJECT: Purchase of Equipment for Fire Department
The City Council needs to approve the purchase of numerous items
of equipment for the fire department. Quotations were received
from three firms on the majority of items . Some items were only
quoted by one supplier. All three firms had the opportunity to
quote on all items .
Conway Fire & Akins Fire Metropolitan
Item Safety Equipment Fire Equip .
12" hose (1000 ft) $1 , 110.00 $1 ,290.00 $1 , 244.00
22" hose (1000 ft) 1 , 740.00 1 ,890.00 1 ,884.00
Rigid Adapters (4) 57 .48 56 .00 69 .00
Quick Loc (8) 172 .00 204.00 178 .00
Double Female 42"x6" 246 .00 185 .00 193 .00
42" male x 32" female
adapter 236 .00 170.00 -
42" male x 22" female
adapter 104.00 123 .00 -
Auto. nozzle with halo ring - 395 .00 410 .00
Super Vac door bars - 110.00 102 .00
Super Vac mounts - 30.00 -
Walk away brackets - 204.00 216 .00
Akron style foam ejector - 165.00 166 .00
6" soft suction hose (20 ft)- 365 .00 576 .00
Barrel strainer - 85.00 -
3-way wye - male - 465.00 -
3-way wye - female - 465 .00 585 .00
Folding ladder - 130.00 X50 .00
22" female x 12" male - 56 .00 69 .00
Air tool kit - - 195 .00
Extensions for air masks (2)- - 95 . 00
Amt . of Successful Quotes
$3 , 126 .00 $2 , 771 .00 $ 392 .00
These items are included in the 1978 General Fund Budget .
Action Required : To approve the purchase of fire hose and related fire
equipment in the amount of $3 , 126 .00 from Conway Fire and Safety,
$2 , 771 .00 from Akins Fire Equipment and $392 .00 from Metropolitan Fire
Equipment in accordance with the City Treasurer' s memo of 3-27-78 .
FEC/klk
Ao
V
association of B U L L E T I N
metropolitan
municipalities March 15, 1978
TO: AMM Designated Delegates FROM: Vern Peterson
and Administrative Officials . Executive Director
ADVANCE, NOTICE
OF
ANNUAL MEETING
To assist all elected officials and administrative staff in planning
their schedules so that they can attend the Annual Meeting, advance
notice is hereby given that the date of the Annual Meeting for 1978 is:
MAY 24th
Tentative plans include a social hour from 5 : 30 to 6:30 P.M. & dinner.
from 6 : 30 to 7 : 30 P.M. , with the business meeting beginning at ap-
proximately 7 : 30 P.M.
NOTE TO ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS: Please distribute copies of
this notice to your city council . One copy has been forwarded
to the designated delegate.
300 hanover bldg. 480 cedar street, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 222-2861
DESMOND, SCHWAB & NEVINS
POST OFFICE BOX 29
SPRINGFIELD, NEW JERSEY 07081
201 376-2442
NEW YORK CITY TELEPHONE
212 227-9150
March 15, 1978
Mr. LeRoy F. Houser
City Assessor
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
RE: Certain-teed Corporation Property
Parcel No. 26AA
Dear Mr. Houser:
Enclosed herewith is an appeal form which we have filled out requesting
that the local Board of Review give consideration to our request that the
100% market value for the Certain-teed Corporation property known as
Parcel No. 26AA in Shakopee, Minnesota, be reduced to $4,247,340 during
their meeting scheduled for April 4, 1978.
Please advise whether or not it is required that a representative be
present at the Board of Review hearing.
Also, could you please send me a breakdown of your values listing the
land areas and land values separately from the building values, as well
as the land improvements values.
Your cooperation in this matter will be very much appreciated.
Best personal regards.
* Very truly yours,
FIS:em re . ` c wa
Enclosure
TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADJ.REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 11 , 1978
Acting Mayor Reinke presiding.
11 Roll Call at 5: 00 P.M.
21 Joint Meeting with the Police Civil Service Commission
31 Motion to remove old business from the table .
41 Old business tabled April 4, 1978
a] Res . No . 1234 - Requesting Minn. DOT to Construct 101 Frontage Road
b] Res . No . 1228 - Designating Applicant ' s Local Agent (Civil Defense)
c ] Res . No. 1229 - Authorizing Execution of Application (Civil Defense
d] Res . No. 1235 - Supporting the Abandonment of the Chicago ,
Milwaukee , St . Paul and Pacific Railroad Company from
Farmington to Shakopee in Dakota and Scott Counties
e ] Res . No . 1232 - Receiving A Report and Calling Hearing on
Improvement 78-3 (Deerview Acres)
f] Res . No. 1236 - Expressing Interest in Proposed Railroad
Abandonment and Potential Re-Use for Regional Recreational
Trail Corridor
g] Ordinance No . 3, 4th Series - Re-Naming Old CR-21
h] 8:00 P.M. BOARD OF REVIEW - Motion to continue
i] Moratorium/10 Acre Minimum Lot Size - in unsewered areas :
11 Res . No. 1237 - Directing Preparation of An Ordinance
Declaring A Moratorium on the Platting of Certain
Unsewered Property for Residential Purposes in the City
of Shakopee Until After Adoption of A Comprehensive Plan
2] Ord. No. 2 , 4th Series - Imposing A Moratorium on the
Platting of Unsewered Property for Residential Purposes
j ] Proposed Revenue Producing Facility - Racquetball Courts
k] Consulting Engineer ' s fee schedule
11 Eleventh Avenue Storm Sewer
m] Discussion of 1978 Swimming Pool Operation
n] Report on Riverside Park Improvements
o] 1978-1980 Police Contract
p] Authorize Entering Into Agreement with the Dog Catcher
51 Other Business :
a]
b]
c ]
61 Adjourn to Tuesday, April 18th at 7 : 30 P.M.
Douglas S. Reeder
City Administrator
TO: Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator
FROM: Fredric E . Christian, City Treasurer
SUBJECT: Racquetball Courts
DATE: April 7 , 1978
I have received the attached letter from Mr. Bob Pulscher . His
comments are not very encouraging as far as the ability to sell
revenue bonds . His comment as to the number of memberships being
too high is not accurate in my opinion. The industry guideline
is that you need 80C to 1000 memberships in order for a court to
be profitable .
I will have the results of the survey tabulated by Tuesday evening.
FEC/kl.k
r .
SPRINGS 183 INCORPORATED MUNICIPAL CONSULTANTS
8UU OSBORN BUILDINu• SAINT IPAut...MINNESOTA 55102•(612) 222-4241
OSMON R.SPRINGSTED,Presidenr DAVID L.GOBLIRSCH,Senior Vice President
ROBERT D.PJLSCHER,Firet Senior Vic.; CAROLYN J.WILLS,Vice President h Secretary-Treasurer
RONALD W.LANGNESS,Senior Vwe President KINGSLEY D.FORNESS,Vice President
5 April 1978
Mr. Fred Christiansen, Treasurer
City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Fred:
We reviewed your proposal to construct an eight court racketball facility which
would require the sale of $620,000 of Gross Revenue Bonds, which you had proposed
to repay over 20 years at 6% interest. The total security for the debt service on
the issue would be the revenues generated by the facility. We sent a copy of that
proposal, together with your pro forma income statement, to five of the major
underwriters in the Twin Cities who would be most apt to bid an issue of this kind.
The purpose of sending the material was to ascertain their interest in bidding so as
to provide you some direction on the possibility of marketing the bonds.
In general four of the five underwriters who indicated some interest in your
proposal were concerned about three primary matters.
1. The first area of concern was the proposed interest rate. Based on
the information in the income statement each of the underwriters
felt that 6% was too low and estimated that the interest rate on the
issue would probably be 7 to 7y2%. As a matter of reference for you,
State law limits the maximum rate of interest on issues of this kind
at 7%.
2. The second major concern was the security for the issue. Under the
existing proposal, debt service would be paid entirely from revenues
generated by the facility. In order to generate sufficient income to
meet operating cost to debt service, the facility would have to be
relatively successful from the very beginning. The underwriters
indicated that there would be a requirement for at least a one year
debt service reserve, a first mortgage on the property, and ideally
additional security offered to the bondholders.
j,
Mr. Fred Christiansen 1
April 5, 1978
Page 2
3. The third area of concern was the length of the issue. While they
indicated that racketball is currently a popular sport its history is
brief and their main concern is whether that interest will be
maintained over a period of the next 20 years.
Because of these concerns, and because of our experience in marketing gross
revenue bonds, it is my opinion that the bonds could not be marketable in their
present form. We hate to foreclose entirely on the possibility of selling bonds for
this program, but in our opinion the chance of marketing the bonds does not
warrant any substantial cash investment on the part of the City relative to any
final design of a building which could not be built unless the bonds could be sold.
I believe the bonds could be marketed, assuming a reasonable bond market
condition, if two things were revised. One would be to reduce the bond issue in
length to 10 payments with the first payment coming due approximately one year
from the estimated completion of the facility. The second major change would be
the establishment of a one year's debt service reserve which could be funded in the
bond program. The combination of these two changes however would indicate that
the anticipated hope of having significant monies available with which to reduce
the cost of the City's recreation program would not be well founded. If the issue
were reduced to 10 years and a reserve established it would be necessary to
increase the amount of the bond issue to $725,000. At that value issue, with a 10
year program, with an interest rate of 7% the average annual debt service would be
approximately $102,000. Since the anticipated operating expenditures for the
facility were $81,100 in the second year and $88,200 in the third year, those
operating expenditure levels combined with the debt service program would not
provide any net income to the City.
I have a further concern for the total number of members which you indicate would
be possible the third year, when the total membership reached 800. It is entirely
possible to attain that level of membership, but it might create a problem in
allocating premium court time. Since there are a limited number of hours when
most people can play handball or racketball, there would be great competition for
those hours. With a membership as large as 800, it would be very difficult to
satisfy those persons, and intense competition for those times would result. The
net effect might be a declining interest on the part of maintaining membership
because of the difficulty of reserving court time. That probably would not effect
your hourly rental business as much as the actual membership that you are able to
retain in succeeding years. However, the membership charges do represent a major
part of your gross operating income.
As indicated previously we are reluctant to foreclose on the marketability of these
bonds. However unless additional information is provided the underwriters, and
unless significant changes are made in the structuring of the issue, it is our opinion
that at this time the bonds are not marketable. If you have any further questions
about this matter please feel free to contact me.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert D. Pulscher /, S
First Senior Vice President U
YAZ
M E M 0
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator
RE: Fee Schedule for Engineering Consultant
DATE:, April 7 , 1978
Attached is a proposed agreement with Suburban Engineering for
1978 and 1979 . The basic elements of this agreement are as
follows :
1 . For construction projects the consultant will be
paid a percent of the construction cost as indi-
cated on the attached curve table . This per cent
ranges from 6% to 10 .05% for our normal projects .
2 . The work to be performed for the above compensation
is spelled out .
3 . Work over and above the services indicated in the
percent payment will be on an hourly basis . These
types of services are also spelled out in the
agreement .
4 . The hourly rate has been adjusted downward for
1978 especially in the princi al engineer areas
and the Project Engineer (EIT� where most of our
money is spent .
5 . The hourly rate for 1979 will be the lesser of
90% of cost of living increases or the fee charged
other customers of Suburban.
Recommendation:
It is my recommendation that the City Administrator and
Mayor be authorized to enter into this agreement . I believe that
this type of an agreement will save us some money . If it does
not, we can renegotiate after we have had some experience . ( I
have also attached for your information last years hourly rate) .
DSR/jei
Attachment
4
Main Office 571-6066
UBUR®4N ��') 6875 Highway No. 65 N. E.
��_ IMOMEEERINO Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432
qa
INC.
N�A South Office 890.6510
Civil, Municipal & Environmental Engineering 1101 Cliff Road
Land Surveying • Land Planning • Soil Testing Burnsville, Minnesota 55337
FEE SCHEDULE FOR ENGINEERING & SURVEYING SERVICES
Effective January 1 ,1977
General Statement
Due ,to the variation in complexity of engineering and surveying projects,
it is often impossible to determine in advance the exact time and effort
that any project will require. Where it is impossible to determine in
advance and set up a project on a fee basis or percentage of construction
cost, all work will be done on an hourly basis in accordance with this
schedule.
Hourly Rates
1 . Principal Engineer $33.00/hour
2. Principal Surveyor $30.00/hour
3. Senior Engineer $29.00/hour
4. Senior Surveyor $26.00/hour
5. Engineer (EIT) $23.00/hour
6. Planner $23.00/hour
7. Designer $21 .00/hour
8. Engineering Aide II $19.00/hour
9. Engineering Aide I $16.00/hour
10. Draftsman/computer $19.00/hour
11 . Draftsman II $15 .50/hour
12. Draftsman I $13.50/hour
13. Project Field Coordinator $19.00/hour
14. Project Field Representative $16.00/hour
15. 3 Man Survey Crew $44.00/hour
16. 2 Man Survey Crew $34.00/hour
Other Personnel
When additional personnel are required with skills other than those listed
above, the hourly fee will be based on salary times a factor of 2.5.
Additional Charges
The above rates will include all normal expenses in the Twin City metropol-
itan area. Outside of this area there will be an additional charge for out-
of-pocket expense and travel .
Rvbe.i Alinder, Reg. Eng. £ A Rathbun, Reg Bury. Wm. E Pace Reg £ng. [:ury R Harru, Reg Sa.s
Ww. E Jewaen, Reg. ,Bra. Wm X. Meyer. Reg. Ens.
H. William Ragere, Reg Sure. Bruce A Paie.sw, Reg- £ra.
TG : Douglas S . Reeder , City Administrator
FROM: Fredric E. Christiansen, City Treasurer
SUBJECT: 1978 Swimming Pool Operations
DATE: April 7 , 1978
The City Council needs tc set the swimming pool fees for 1978 and
also adopt the 1978 budget . The recommended budget with a compar-
ison to previous years is shown below.
Revenue or Expenditure 1976 1977 ' 78 Budget
Season Tickets 15 , 173 13 ,426 15 ,879
Admissions 4, 649 3 , 519 4, 100
Swimming Lessons 6 , 320 5 , 639 5 , 807
Misc . Pool Income 1 ,479 40 100
Concessions - Pool 3 , 916 2 , 849 3 ,400
Refunds & Reimbursements 63 597 500
Total Revenue $31 ,600 $26 ,070 $29 , 786
Salaries - Part time 245359 21 , 190 19, 830
Workmen ' s Comp. Insurance - - 1 ,000
General Supplies 559 382 450
Chemicals 1 , 245 1 , 108 1 , 300
Equip . Maint . and Repair 259 645 600
Eldg. Naint . and Repair 227 139 150
Postage 3 7 15
Telephone 70 49 100
Printing & Reproduction 264 216 250
Prop . & Boiler Insurance - 425 500
Electricity 15346 1 , 173 1 , 200
Natural Gas & Heating 135 191 220
Water 570 762 800
Garbage Disposal 72 66 100
Conferences & Schools - 14 25
Current Use Charges 799 637 850
Merchandise for Resale 1 , 717 15267 1 , 500
Refunds - 100 50
Sales Tax 739 651 750
Miscellanecus - _ 13 25
Total Expenditures $32 , 364 $29 ,035 $29 , 715
( 764 2 , 96 71
Page 2 - 1978 Swimming Pool
As you can see , the experience has not been good from a profit and
loss standpoint . I think that the last two years show the extreme
in weather conditions . 1976 was a very hot summer and season tick-
et sales were very high. Tctal attendence for open swimming was
46 , 364 people . As it turned out , the pool did come close to break-
ing even. The City made adjustments in the fees that would have
gotten the pool into the profit column. The changes made in swim-
ming lessons and concession sales did work as planned . The swim-
ming lessons made a profit of $780. 7C and the concessions made a
profit of $39 . 91 . The bad news is that oper, swimming lost $3 , 785 . 63 :
The total loss for the pcol was $2 , 964. 97 . There was cool weather
at the beginning of the year and seascn tickets were down substan-
tially. Open swimming attendence fcr 1977 was 29 , 156 people - only
63% of the 1976 attendence. Season tickets were raised $2 .00 in
1977 but I don' t believe this was the major cause of the decline .
My reasoning is based on the fact that season tickets were raised
$4.00 in 1976 and the City sold 25 more tickets that year. A com-
parison of past ticket sales is shown below.
1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 Est .
Season Tick.-Fam. 526-$22 503-$22 528-$26 431-$28 300-$28
X200-$31
Season Tick.-Indv. 66-$14 64-$14 98-$15 75-$15 X50-$15
30-$16
Guest Ticket 7-$5 14-$5 3-$7 4-$7 7-$7
Lessons 1169 1160 1059 932 960
The significant drop in attendence also hurt the concession stand .
Mcre swimmers would have bought more candy but the labor costs would
have been the same .
The recommended 1978 budget is a break-even operation. This was
achieved by the following changes :
1 . A significant drop in hours of operation
The 1978 schedule calls for open swimming from 1 :00 p .m. to
4 : 30 p .m. and 6 : 30 p.m. to 8 : 30 p .m. There would be no open
swimming on Sunday evenings (6 : 30 p .m . to 8 : 30 p.m. ) . In
1977 , the Fool was open until 5 :00 p .m. and 9 :00 p.m. seven
days a week.
2 . An anticipated increase in the number of season tickets .
The estimate of 500 family tickets is based on the average
of the four previous years (497 tickets) . The season ticket
fee will remain the same if purchased prior to June 1st .
After that date , the fee will be $31 for a family ticket
and $16 for an individual . I am "guessing" that 300 family
tickets would be sold in May and 200 in June . Approximately
105 family tickets were sold in May of last year.
Page 3 - 1978 Swimming Pool
3 . The Minnesota Correctional Institution will be charged
a flat rate of $12 .00 per evening when they swim over
the supper hour . This covers our costs .
Conclusion
The key to the entire budget is the attendence . If season tickets
are as estimated, the pool should do all right . The labor costs
are based on a staffing level and number of hours worked that can
handle a warm summer and high attendence . The breakdown cf the
1978 budget gives an estimated loss of $382 for open swimming, a
profit of $116 for lessons and a profit of $337 for concessions .
Expenditures can' t be cut any closer . Revenue may be better depend-
ing on the number of season tickets . If season ticket sales for
families are considerably under 500 cn June 15th, the City will have
to seriously consider closing the pool on a second night . The 1978
budget dces not include any park department labor costs . Fees will
have to be raised if the City wants to cover those costs .
My recommendation is that the City Council adopt the attached 1978
fee schedule and hours of operation for the Swimming Pool .
FEC/klk
1978. SWIMMING POOL FEE SCHEDULE
Season Ticket - Family $28 .00 (before June 1 , 1978
$31 .00 (after June 1 , 1978)
Season Ticket - Individual $15 .00 (before June 1 , 1978)
$16 .00 (after June 1 , 1978)
Guest Ticket ( 7 days) $ 7 .00
Adult Gate Admission $ 1 .00
Child Gate Admission $ . 75
Instruction: Adults $ 8 .00
Child $ 6 .00
Open Swimming : June 3 - August 20
1 : 00 p .m. to 4 : 30 p.m. (7 days a week)
6 : 30 p.m. to 8 : 30 p .m. (closed on Sundays)
Swimming Lessons : June 12 - August 4
Classes Monday - Friday (exception July 4)
Hours : 9 : 30 - 12 : 30; 5 : 30-6 : 15
..wr•!„tw. .f:.., � r,"�p e� ar+i„�yy±N '�"�Iw+y
i
J7Lq,1i `j
LL
SHAKOPEE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 720
SCOTT COUNTY
TENTH AND LEWIS
MICHAEL J.WALSH SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 THOMAS E.ROLLOFF
Principal TEL. 445-4884 Ass't Principal
March 10, 1978
MAR 1 ` •
Doug Reeder
Shakopee City Council CITY OF S3iI�►KPEE
Shakopee, Minnesota
Dear Doug:
The Shakopee Community Education Advisory Council is again asking your
organization to choose a representative to serve during the 1978-79
academic year.
The primary task 'bf the Council is to make recommendations to the school
board on the expenditures of Community Education funds (approximately
$30,000) . Wider community representation than we have had can help
us to better represent the diverse needs of Shakopee.
We have recommended support for the Recreation Program, Shakopee
Library, and Adult Great Books Program among others and have had
input into the adult education programs held in the evenings,
We meet no more than six times during the year. New members
should attend a meeting on April 13th, 6:00-7:00 p.m. at the
school district Board Room (505 S. Holmes) . At that time we will
discuss organizing for next ---`all.
Even though this is short notice, we would appreciate prompt action
in selecting a person to serve. Call me (445-3717 at work or 445-
6023 at home) or Community Education Director Tom Rolloff (445-4884,
Extension 233) to give us the name of your representative for 78-79.
Sincerely,
relKnudsokn, 77-78 Chairperson
Shakopee Community Education Advisory Council
AN I Qk,-Al OPPOR T k M T 1 1 vilt ON I R